30 May 2004 | In Passing...

30 May 2004

Submitted by eve on Sun, 05/30/2004 - 3:46pm. Um...

"I always feel thinner when I'm tan. You know how black pants are slimming? Dark colors? It's like black pants for your whole body."
"Except black pants don't kill you."
--Two women talking in the produce section at Whole Foods

» add new comment

Hand it over

Posted by marinerd on Wed, 06/30/2004 - 9:12am.

I read an email about this very subject this morning, so here it is, including footnotes:

Speaking at the NATO conference in Turkey yesterday, President Bush said, "15 months after the liberation of Iraq...the world witnessed the arrival of a free and sovereign Iraqi government." [1] The reality, however, is much different.

The same day that U.S. administrator Paul Bremer officially ended the occupation, U.S. prosecutors refused to abide by an Iraqi judge's order acquitting Iraqi citizen Iyad Akmush Kanum of attempted murder of coalition troops. [2] Instead, the prosecutors returned Kanum to the infamous Abu Ghraib prison, claiming that "they were not bound by Iraqi law."

In the days leading up to his departure, Bremer "issued a raft of edicts" in an effort to "exert U.S. control over the country after the transfer of political authority."[3] Specifically, Bremer empowered a seven-member appointed commission "to disqualify political parties and any of the candidates they support." Bremer also "appointed Iraqis handpicked by his aides to influential positions in the interim government" with multi-year terms to "promote his concepts of governance" after the handover.

Iraq remains plagued by violence and "the primary military responsibility for fighting the insurgency remains as much in American hands as it did yesterday."[4] As a result, the New York Times concludes it is "ludicrous for administration officials to suggest that America's occupation of Iraq has now somehow ended."

SOURCES:
1. "Remarks by President Bush and Prime Minister Blair," Whitehouse.gov, 6/28/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1216901&l=42686.
2. "Prisoner 27075 learns limits of sovereignty, Financial Times, 6/29/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1216901&l=42687
3. "U.S. Edicts Curb Power Of Iraq's Leadership," Washington Post, 6/27/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1216901&l=42688"
4. "A Secretive Transfer in Iraq," New York Times, 6/29/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1216901&l=42689

» reply to this comment

Good points

Posted by Jon on Thu, 07/01/2004 - 10:09am.

mari, on 2 of those points, I would agree that they point to a lack of legitimacy in the handover. The first seems to be a point of law regarding an Iraqi citizen, though I do not know enough about international law to make an informed judgement about it.
The second does seem to be interference in Iraqi political processes, which I do not approve of.

On the last point, however, I think there may be some misunderstanding. The coalition is currently training Iraqi citizens to form their own army. I do not know much about the process of creating an army, but I am led to understand it might take an extended period of time, to do it correctly.
If the options are to:
a) Provide assistance to the Iraqis while they help train the new army;
or
b) Leave the country in the hands of a partially-formed and trained army;
then I would favor the first choice.

I have emotional reactions to some of the terminology and sources cited, but that is not relevant to the topic at hand.

» reply to this comment

Army...

Posted by ParU on Thu, 07/01/2004 - 12:57pm.

Actually you raise an important point, what's the function of the Army? In the US, Posse Comititus (sp?) prohibits using the Army internally (except in very special cases, as Eisenhower did in Little Rock). And Costa Rica gets by very well without an Army. What Iraq needs is Police (which they're getting) and a very small Army (as long as the US is there, ain't nobody going to try to invade). Which is interesting, as armies and police have very different training and goals.
It's Amino world without Chemists

» reply to this comment

And that may be part of the problem

Posted by TheEileen on Fri, 09/24/2004 - 9:35am.

It seems to me. We have military trying to train a police force. I know that the National Reserves, etc., have been very much trying to get police over there to assist with the training of the Iraqis, but there is still a preponderance of military doing the training.

And the focus is different and the skill set is different and the MINDset is different.

The Eileen
Take the road not taken - the leaves crunch that much louder!

» reply to this comment

Solution?

Posted by Jon on Fri, 09/24/2004 - 10:24am.

TheE, you've stated the problem succinctly. Do you have any suggestions on resolving it?

» reply to this comment

Of course not!

Posted by TheEileen on Thu, 09/30/2004 - 3:36pm.

Like everyone else in the world, I take my role to be that of the "pointer-outer of problems" not the "figure-outer of the solutions". GRYN

I have 20/20 hindsight with the best of 'em. I was never happy about going into Iraq in the first place, mainly because I strongly feel that pre-emptive strikes open up a slippery slope of moral issues (to consciously mix my metaphors). If we say we get to do it cuz we think someone else is a threat - we have no moral highground to stand on when someone whacks us cuz we appear to be a threat to them.

But I have absolutely hated the term "War" on Terrorism from the beginning because that does shape the mindset (how well are we doing on that "war" on poverty, hmmm?). We went into Iraq thinking about the war and not the aftermath and the rebuild and we (and unfortunately they) are reaping the results of that blinkered thinking. This truly should have been a "police action". Terrorists are punk criminals and should not get the status "war" confers on them - not the least of which has to do with the fact that they are not a country or a defined, easily found set of people.

How can we do better in Iraq? I am not sure, I am not sure George knows and even though I'm gonna vote for him, I'm not sure John knows either. I am not sure anyone really knows. If we pull out - power vacuum and a second abandonment of those poor people. If we stay there - continued focus of terrorism and increase the feeling of "we're being occupied".

Perhaps trying to shift the focus and purpose and re-define as "how can we help them help themselves" would be the best way. Hell, WEPA them (am I getting that acronymn right?) - if there was so much work going on that everyone had a job and income, that would make a start at addressing some of their issues. And if Iraq-citizan JoeSchmoe just spent days building something and getting paid for it that some terrorist blows up - they would be more righteously angry at the terrorist. "That guy just blew up MY dam", rather than "Ha,ha, that guy sure put it to the occupiers".

What do you think?

The Eileen Take the road not taken - the leaves crunch that much louder!

» reply to this comment

No Friday songs?

Posted by Alice on Fri, 06/18/2004 - 9:47pm.

No one has a FRiday song? ...I feel so... unfulfilled.

» reply to this comment

How 'bout something from the ol' Raindog?

Posted by paul on Sat, 06/19/2004 - 12:16am.

Tom Waits is really one of the most underrated songwriters out there...

Operator, number, please:
it's been so many years
Will she remember my old voice
while I fight the tears?
Hello, hello there, is this Martha?
this is old Tom Frost,
And I am calling long distance,
don't worry 'bout the cost.
'Cause it's been forty years or more,
now Martha please recall,
Meet me out for coffee,
where we'll talk about it all.

And those were the days of roses,
poetry and prose and Martha
all I had was you and all you had was me.
There was no tomorrows,
we'd packed away our sorrows
And we saved them for a rainy day.

And I feel so much older now,
and you're much older too,
How's your husband?
and how's the kids?
you know that I got married too?
Lucky that you found someone
to make you feel secure,
'Cause we were all so young and foolish,
now we are mature.

And those were the days of roses,
poetry and prose and Martha
all I had was you and all you had was me.
There was no tomorrows,
we'd packed away our sorrows
And we saved them for a rainy day.

And I was always so impulsive,
I guess that I still am,
And all that really mattered then
was that I was a man.
I guess that our being together
was never meant to be.
And Martha, Martha,
I love you can't you see?

And those were the days of roses,
poetry and prose and Martha
all I had was you and all you had was me.
There was no tomorrows,
we'd packed away our sorrows
And we saved them for a rainy day.

And I remember quiet evenings
trembling close to you...

» reply to this comment

Posted by Matt on Fri, 06/18/2004 - 10:42pm.

One of my longtime favorites:

When I find myself in times of trouble
Mother Mary comes to me
Speaking words of wisdom, let it be.
And in my hour of darkness
She is standing right in front of me
Speaking words of wisdom, let it be.
Let it be, let it be, let it be, let it be.
Whisper words of wisdom, let it be.

And when the broken hearted people
Living in the world agree,
There will be an answer, let it be.
For though they may be parted there is
Still a chance that they will see
There will be an answer, let it be.
Let it be, let it be, let it be, let it be.
There will be an answer, let it be.
Let it be, let it be, let it be, let it be.
Whisper words of wisdom, let it be.

Let it be, let it be, let it be, yeah let it be.
Whisper words of wisdom, let it be.

And when the night is cloudy,
There is still a light that shines on me,
Shine on until tomorrow, let it be.
I wake up to the sound of music
Mother Mary comes to me
Speaking words of wisdom, let it be.
Let it be, let it be, let it be, yeah let it be.
There will be an answer, let it be.
Let it be, let it be, let it be, yeah let it be.
There will be an answer, let it be.
Let it be, let it be, let it be, yeah let it be.
Whisper words of wisdom, let it be.

» reply to this comment

Great song

Posted by umrguy on Sat, 06/19/2004 - 5:17am.

I prefer the original album version though (there are now three versions: the album version, the single version, and the re-released, remixed (or unremixed might be more accurate) album version).

-There's someone in my head, but it's not me.-

» reply to this comment

Alright, fine, I'll do it myself

Posted by Alice on Fri, 06/18/2004 - 9:53pm.

Here is my Friday song:

October
by Rosie Thomas

Make her a flower in late December
When the sun is not shining on her
Write her a love song and play it all day long
To remind her of all that she is worth
Never never leave her
Take her on long drives for ice-cream by sea sides
And give her your coat when she is cold
Tell her you miss her when you’re close enough to kiss her
And that you’d walk a thousand miles to tell her so
But never never leave her
Take photographs of her on Brooklyn street in October
When her nervous smile is slightly curved
Some days when she is slightly down tell her it’s okay to frown
It makes you just fall more in love with her
But never never leave her

» reply to this comment

Sunshine

Posted by marinerd on Thu, 06/17/2004 - 8:35am.

From what I've read, sunshine really is essential for health. Getting sunburned is bad, even a little bit. There's also been research (no, I don't have any footnotes handy, you'll have to look it up) that people who don't get enough sunlight have a greater instance of MS. And there's been research (which I'm sure is being refuted as we speak) that sunblock may not be very good for us, either. Sigh! I guess we'll have to use restraint and common sense? Ha!

» reply to this comment

VLPF

Posted by Jon on Thu, 06/17/2004 - 10:58am.

I've invented a new technology that will save us from the ravages of sunburn! It has an acronym, so it is clearly scientific.
VLPF: Very Large Palm Fronds

It will also improve the economy, as it creates jobs for the Very Large Palm Frond Carriers.

» reply to this comment

Very lame movie, but...

Posted by miss liss on Thu, 06/17/2004 - 12:35pm.

I would like to be shaded by a Very Large Palm Frond carried by an almost naked Brad Pitt.

» reply to this comment

By george!

Posted by Alice on Fri, 06/18/2004 - 8:53am.

I think you have something there! VLPFs and NBP will cure skin cancer, save the ozone, boost the economy and peel over 100 eggs in less than a minute!

I must have one!

» reply to this comment

Hrm

Posted by Jon on Tue, 06/15/2004 - 7:51am.

*sigh* I don't remember what the article said was necessary for limited sunlight exposure. I'm pretty sure it wasn't vitD though.

» reply to this comment

Bare necessity ?

Posted by peegee on Mon, 06/14/2004 - 1:11pm.

Just to add to the confusion wrt. Vitamin D, I heard it is the other way round. It is contained in some foods (e.g. eggs, fish, liver), but given the raw materials adults can produce it themselves (here the exposure to sun is necessary). Children cannot produce Vitamin D and hence need to get it through their diet.

» reply to this comment

Grain of salt

Posted by Jon on Mon, 06/14/2004 - 7:16am.

My brother has given me a subscription to one of those "healthy living" magazines. It's wasted on me, as I tend to avoid exercise and nutritious foods. There was an article in it summarizing research, that seemed to indicate that some amount of sunlight was necessary for health, that avoiding the sun entirely could have some bad effects.
Still, caveat lector (Let the Reader beware): it was a fluff science piece that summarized and opined, not a peer-reviewed publication. As such, the results could be suspect.

» reply to this comment

Vitamins

Posted by Alice on Mon, 06/14/2004 - 9:47am.

I think there's a vitamin your body can't make or absorb or something without sunlight, maybe vitamin D? Or B? Hmmmm. My memory of biology is kinda fuzzy, but I think that's what the article might mean.
You should still wear sunscreen though.

Sunscreen!

~Leader of the Fair-skinned Sunscreen Patrol

» reply to this comment

Vitamin D.

Posted by paul on Mon, 06/14/2004 - 10:10am.

Your skin needs some exposure to sunlight to manufacture the stuff- you can get it in enriched milk, I think, but it's better to get some sun and get a little exercise and fresh air...

Note that I said "a little".

It's well we cannot hear the screams
we make in other peoples' dreams.
--Edward Gorey

» reply to this comment

...

Posted by daen on Mon, 06/14/2004 - 10:22am.

I believe it's something on the order of "10 minutes' exposure of face and arms to winter-level sunlight per day."
Or is it per week?

Anyway, as long as you don't habitually wear a full burka, you should be okay.

» reply to this comment

Spray of tan?

Posted by hypoxic on Sat, 06/12/2004 - 4:29pm.

Maybe she should try a spray on tan to prevent the skin cancer risk. then everyone wins!

» reply to this comment

"Everybody wins"?

Posted by umrguy on Sat, 06/12/2004 - 7:15pm.

*suppresses comment about skin cancer chlorinating the gene pool*

...oh, wait.

-There's someone in my head, but it's not me.-

» reply to this comment

Classy

Posted by Alice on Sat, 06/12/2004 - 5:22pm.

I think people feel spray-on tans aren't classy, but then, I don't think tanning booths are all that classy either. I would rather spray dye on my skin than pay for cancer.
Because of the weather (I live in Washington state) the sorority girls are my university are always fake-'n-baked, and they put stickers on so that afterward, there's a white playboy bunny or dolphin or heart surrounded by crispy tan.
...Yeah, definitely NOT classy.

» reply to this comment

And then...

Posted by paul on Sun, 06/13/2004 - 8:19am.

they frost their hair as well so they have supposed sun-streaks in it.

Around here we call 'em fake bake frosted flakes.

It's well we cannot hear the screams
we make in other peoples' dreams.
--Edward Gorey

» reply to this comment

Don't be hate'n the sorority

Posted by Social Neanderthal on Mon, 06/14/2004 - 2:54pm.

Don't be hate'n the sorority ladies just because they have different priorities...

...all God's creatures serve a purpose in this wonderful world of ours.

A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.

» reply to this comment

It wasn't

Posted by paul on Mon, 06/14/2004 - 11:15pm.

the sorority types I was thinking of with that comment- it was the middle aged divorced women who feel the need to feel sexy and go about this by tanning themselves as far as they can and dyeing their hair unnatural shades and wearing the cute little outfits they saw on the little hotties downtown, conveniently forgetting that the little hotties didn't have extra rolls and bulges that show in those outfits and don't have stretch marks and all the rest of the things that most of us prefer not to see exposed. This generally makes them look as natural and healthy and desirable as Nutra-Sweet, and is about the same as hanging a sign around their neck that says "Dumped and Desperate". Frankly, when I see a woman like that I steer clear, and if they approach I start lobstering. They scare me.

And yes, my ex falls squarely in the middle of that category. Bleagh.

It's well we cannot hear the screams
we make in other peoples' dreams.
--Edward Gorey

» reply to this comment

Lobstering?

Posted by Alice on Wed, 06/16/2004 - 9:26am.

...Lobstering?

» reply to this comment

...

Posted by daen on Wed, 06/16/2004 - 10:18am.

For explanation, try checking this thread.

» reply to this comment

Wow

Posted by Alice on Wed, 06/16/2004 - 10:48am.

That is a crazy thread. So many inside references!
So, I conclude that Lobstering is either
1. v. to back away from, waving one's pincers
2. v. to change one's name, address, state or face to avoid unwanted advances
3. v. to do something unmentionable involving butter sauce

hmm.

» reply to this comment

Posted by Matt on Thu, 06/17/2004 - 10:52pm.

*sigh* I miss those days. Really, Alice, I can't explain it. You just had to be there. It was wacky and free and energetic and...

Suddenly I sound really, really old. Like 50. *sigh*

» reply to this comment

Those Good Old Days When We Were Useful...

Posted by umrguy on Fri, 06/18/2004 - 12:44am.

There are many of us who miss those days... and a lot of names gone MIA... like whatever happened to Montygirl?

"I remember when In Passing didn't even HAVE comments... and we were GRATEFUL for it!" /grumpy old man voice

-There's someone in my head, but it's not me.-

» reply to this comment

You talking 'bout me...???

Posted by ParU on Mon, 06/21/2004 - 2:56pm.

I too miss Montygirl and the 'political' thread and, of course, our own Efreeti. But I know what happened to him, he's on a secret mission (honest).
It's Amino world without Chemists

» reply to this comment

Alas

Posted by peegee on Tue, 06/22/2004 - 7:25am.

I miss Montygirl too. The carefree days when she would whip out her bittergirl-cape. The political thread died, I think, because the discussions in some sense became too heated and people too opinionated. The dream thread is still around though...

» reply to this comment

The political thread

Posted by hypoxic on Tue, 06/22/2004 - 9:47am.

pretty much died because it was just two-three people and it got boring :)

The heated people sorta dropped off of it since it was buried. Oh well it was a good thread while it lasted.

» reply to this comment

Or maybe

Posted by marinerd on Fri, 06/25/2004 - 12:28pm.

Some of us finally quit the political thread when we realized we'd never be able to force the conservatives to recant and move towards the light.

*g*

» reply to this comment

You talkin' bought moi???

Posted by ParU on Mon, 06/28/2004 - 11:27pm.

My fine feathered friend?
It's Amino world without Chemists

» reply to this comment

Hmm

Posted by peegee on Tue, 06/29/2004 - 2:48am.

In a sarcasto-polemical way I could go for some empirical data on this matter. And step right back into the tar-pits.

So, ahem, does anybody else feel that the handover of sovereignity to Iraq is nothing but a farce ?

» reply to this comment

Iraq...

Posted by ParU on Tue, 06/29/2004 - 6:28pm.

What is sovereignity? If it means the right to 'control' your own destiny through elected officials (or unelected despots), then Iraq has it. Actually, if you think about it, sovereignity only exists if other nations say it exists. So the Russian republics supposedly were 'sovereign' (including the Baltics who got their own UN delegates) but nobody thought that the USSR didn't call the shots, so their 'sovereignity' was useless/valueless. In the case of Iraq, if all the rest of the world says they're sovereign, then they are.
Another example would be Swaiziland and Lesotho and the other 'homelands' in South Africa that no one really treated like real nations. You're only a 'nation' if the 'big boys' say you are.
It's Amino world without Chemists

» reply to this comment

Hmm (again)

Posted by peegee on Wed, 06/30/2004 - 2:14am.

Now, I'm confused. I see three varying definitions of sovereignity there: (1) when your calling your own shots (2) if the rest of the world says so and (3) if the big boys say so.

I'm not sure I would say Iraq is sovereign by any of these standards. (3) is certainly the easiest, since the US are the biggest boy around and they can just choose to say Iraq is sovereign, as they have indeed done. Some other big boys are US allies so it doesn't surprise me they follow the lead.

As for the Iraq administration calling its own shots (I must label them unelected despots, as they have been appointed by the US, rather than elected by anyone) I think no. After all the dominant militant force in Iraq is still the US. And one of the last acts of the US administration was to grant legal immunity to the US troops and everyone they employ. The Iraqi government might change that of course but given the amount of US soldiers still around, given who they were appointed by, how likely is it they will bite the hand that feeds them.

As for the rest of the world, I have heard too much doubting voices with regard to the sovereignity of Iraq. I'm just not convinced. But I wasn't thinking of just that anyway, when I suggested I thought the handover farcical. Whatever.

» reply to this comment

Let's farce the music

Posted by Jon on Tue, 06/29/2004 - 7:53am.

Not particularly. I tend to think that if it's a joke, the Iraqi officials (who have the most to lose) would make a giant stink about it. In the end, though, that might not matter as much.

Here's how it could play out, with various hypotheticals:
1) Handover is actually "a farce", and Iraqi people consider it "a farce". Likely result: revolution of some sort, violent or not.
2) Handover is "a farce", Iraqi people think it's real. Likely result: Some stability, which ends when the truth is found out.
3) Handover is actual, Iraqis consider it "a farce". Likely result: Iraqis undermine the leadership of those officials representing them, system ends without outside intervention.
4) Handover is actual, Iraqis consider it actual. Likely result: Greatest chance for stability.

In my opinion, therefore, the greatest determining factor in the success of the handover is how the Iraqis treat it.

» reply to this comment

Actually...

Posted by umrguy on Mon, 06/21/2004 - 4:16pm.

ParU I was thinking of more of a Dana Carvey "old man" character. And anyway, if memory serves, I was posting on here some time before you were :)

-There's someone in my head, but it's not me.-

» reply to this comment

As was I...

Posted by paul on Mon, 06/21/2004 - 5:15pm.

Hey, does that mean that I outrank ParU?

*happy dance*

It's well we cannot hear the screams
we make in other peoples' dreams.
--Edward Gorey

» reply to this comment

Rank...

Posted by ParU on Wed, 06/23/2004 - 2:51pm.

Well you certainly are more rank than I. *g*
Holds his nose together in a gesture of an unpleasant odor
It's Amino world without Chemists

» reply to this comment

Yes

Posted by umrguy on Mon, 06/21/2004 - 7:50pm.

It's like the Stonecutters :)

-There's someone in my head, but it's not me.-

» reply to this comment

Posted by Matt on Mon, 06/21/2004 - 9:40pm.

You know, what's killing me right now is I know that reference is funny. It's oblique and witty and perfectly placed.

But for the life of me I can't remember why.

Damn.

» reply to this comment

The Stonecutters

Posted by hypoxic on Tue, 06/22/2004 - 9:44am.

Were a Simpsons reference. It was the secret club that ran the government and had all these secret perks. Also hierarchy was determined by seniority of membership.

And I'm hoping that I am replying to the correct comment since I still view this in flat expanded.

» reply to this comment

Posted by Matt on Fri, 06/18/2004 - 10:25am.

I got an email from Montygirl last week. She had to stop posting because her company cracked down on non-work-related internet usage, and she doesn't have a computer at home. So there you go. But she misses all of us.

» reply to this comment

*passes around the envelope*

Posted by steff on Fri, 06/18/2004 - 10:33am.

we miss her toooooo! and bittergirl as well, of course.

the envelope is for the fund to buy her a computer. please keep yer grubby paws out of it unless you're contributing.

» reply to this comment

One more vote

Posted by steff on Fri, 06/18/2004 - 9:50am.

...for the good ol' days, when i got to be at the computer constantly. *sniff* i - i miss you guys! *waaaaaaa!*

damn. we ARE getting old. heh.

» reply to this comment